Snyder v. Castro ( 2015 )

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
_________________________________________
)
JANET L. SNYDER, et al., )
)
Plaintiffs, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No. 15-0568 (ESH)
)
JULIAN CASTRO, in his capacity as )
SECRETARY OF THE UNITED STATES )
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN )
DEVELOPMENT, )
)
Defendant. )
_________________________________________ )
ORDER
On June 12, 2015, defendant filed a motion pursuant to Rule 12(b)(1) of the Federal
Rules of Civil Procedure to dismiss plaintiff’s complaint as moot. (Def.’s Mot. To Dismiss For
Mootness, June 12, 2015 [ECF No. 18].) Plaintiffs’ response to this motion was due on or
before June 29, 2015, but plaintiffs have neither responded nor sought an extension of time in
which to respond. The Local Rules for this Court provide that if a party fails to file an
opposition to a motion “within the prescribed time, the Court may treat the motion as conceded.”
LCvR 7(b); see Fox v. Am. Airlines, Inc., 389 F.3d 1291, 1295 (D.C. Cir. 2004) (“[W]here the
district court relies on the absence of a response as a basis for treating the motion as conceded,
we honor its enforcement of the rule.” (quoting Twelve John Does v. District of Columbia, 117
F.3d 571, 577 (D.C. Cir.1997))). Accordingly, it is hereby
ORDERED that defendant’s Motion to Dismiss [ECF No. 18] is GRANTED as
conceded; and it is further
ORDERED that the above-captioned matter is DISMISSED.
/s/ Ellen Segal Huvelle
ELLEN SEGAL HUVELLE
United States District Judge
Date: July 8, 2015
2